Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Morando Trini v. Supt. Reyes

May 20, 2011

MORANDO TRINI
v.
SUPT. REYES, ET AL.



Name of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge Ronald A. Guzman than Assigned Judge

CASE TITLE

(2010-1107141)

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

The plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 4), is granted. The Court orders the trust fund officer at the plaintiff's place of incarceration to deduct $73.33 from the plaintiff's account for payment to the clerk of court as an initial partial filing fee, and to continue making monthly deductions in accordance with this order. The clerk shall send a copy of this order to the Supervisor of Inmate Trust Fund Accounts, Cook County Dept. of Corrections Administrative Office, Division V, 2700 S. California, Chicago, IL 60608. However, summonses shall not issue at this time. The Court dismisses the complaint on file without prejudice. The plaintiff is granted thirty days in which to submit a proposed amended complaint (plus a Judge's copy and service copies). Failure to submit a proposed amended complaint within thirty days of the date of this order will result in summary dismissal of this case. The clerk is directed to provide the plaintiff with an amended civil rights complaint form and instructions along with a copy of this order. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt. No. 5) is denied without prejudice.

O[ For further details see text below.]

STATEMENT

Pro se plaintiff Morado Trini is a detainee at the Cook County Jail. He has brought a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 challenging his treatment. Pending before the Court are plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 4), complaint for an initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, (Dkt. No. 1), and motion for appointment of counsel. (Dkt. No. 5).

The plaintiff motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 4), is granted. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), the plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $73.33. The trust fund officer at the plaintiff's place of incarceration is directed to collect, when funds exist, the partial filing fee from the plaintiff's trust fund account and pay it directly to the clerk of court. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the plaintiff's trust fund officer is authorized and ordered to collect monthly payments from the plaintiff's trust fund account in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month's income credited to the account. Monthly payments collected from the plaintiff's trust fund account shall be forwarded to the clerk of court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 until the full $350 filing fee is paid. All payments shall be sent to the Clerk, United States District Court, 219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, Illinois 60604, attn: Cashier's Desk, 20th Floor, and shall clearly identify the plaintiff's name and this case number. The inmate trust account office shall notify transferee authorities of any outstanding balance in the event of the plaintiff's transfer to another correctional facility.

Turning to the initial review, plaintiff's proposed complaint is unacceptable and is dismissed. Plaintiff is given leave to submit a proposed amended complaint.

Plaintiff alleges that he was handcuffed with his hands behind his back for an extended period of time. The complaint at one point states a few hours while at other points alleged that the handcuffing occurred over a week. Regardless, plaintiff alleges that his shoulder was injured, and possibly dislocated, by the event. He informed Jail officials that he was in pain and needed medical attention, but to no avail.

Plaintiff sets forth claims for both deliberate indifference to his medical needs, and unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. Forrest v. Prine, 620 F.3d 739, 744 (7th Cir. 2010) (citing Whitley v. Albers,475 U.S. 312, 319 (1986); Lewis v. Downey, 581 F.3d 467, 475 (7th Cir. 2009)) (wanton infliction of pain); Berry v. Peterman, 604 F.3d 435, 439 (7th Cir. 2010) (citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104-05 (1976); Johnson v. Doughty, 433 F.3d 1001, 1010 (7th Cir. 2006)) (deliberate indifference to medical needs). However, his proposed complaint is unsatisfactory because he names supervisory officials Reyes, Brown, Dart, Mueller and Godinez, but does not claim that they had any personal involvement in the alleged unconstitutional violation. Instead, plaintiff alleges that these defendants have created an official policy or custom condoning this type of alleged mistreatment.

"Section 1983 lawsuits against individuals require personal involvement in the alleged constitutional deprivation to support a viable claim." Palmer v. Marion County, 327 F.3d 588, 594 (7th Cir. 2003) (citing Zimmerman v. Tribble, 226 F.3d 568, 574 (7th Cir. 2000); Zentmyer v. Kendall County, Ill., 220 F.3d 805, 811 (7th Cir. 2000); Davis v. Zirkelbach, 149 F.3d 614, 619 (7th Cir. 1998)). Agency principles of respondent superior and vicarious liability do not apply to § 1983 claims. Kinslow v. Pullara, 538 F.3d 687, 692 (7th Cir. 2008) (citing Monell v. New York City Dep't Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978); Hosty v. Carter, 412 F.3d 731, 733 (7th Cir. 2005)); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937,1948 (2009) ("[P]laintiff must plead that each government official defendant, through the official's own individual actions, has violated the Constitution.").

However, correctional officials may violate the Constitution resulting in their own individual liability if they "know about the unconstitutional conduct and facilitate it, approve it, condone it, or turn a blind eye for fear of what they might see." T.E. v. Grindle, 599 F.3d 583, 588 (7th Cir. 2010) (citing Jones v. City of Chicago, 856 F.2d 985, 992 (7th Cir. 1988)). A person is personally liable when his own conduct causes the constitutional violation. Chavez v. Illinois State Police, 251 F.3d 612, 652 (7th Cir. 2001); see also Jones, 856 F.2d at 993 ("In constitutional tort cases as in other cases, a man is responsible for the natural consequences of his actions.") (citations omitted).

Plaintiff should name as defendants the individuals who were personally responsible for allegedly injuring him with the handcuffs and ignoring his requests for medical assistance. He should only name a supervisor as an individual ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.